Perhaps HSUS is finding it harder to get good honest press-written stories, so they simply generate their own? When part of the same organization pats another part on the back, isn’t that called “glad-handing”? At any rate, it surely doesn’t cast a grand light of accomplishment when you have to resort to fronts to get kudos.

Reading the background info of a ‘new’ animal rights group employee is pretty much like reading the pedigree of an inbred animal. Wonder how many generations it takes to remove the nepotism gene?

Wow…I wish I could say I’m surprised, but, unfortunately, it lines up with everything else the HSUS does: It looks good at first glance, but fails to stand up to any kind of scrutiny.  Thanks for providing that scrutiny, HumaneWatch!

Lets see ... I shall make up another organization to give me an award then put out a press release. How shallow can you get?

Well, when you make up your own awards and present them to yourself ...

One hand clapping.

Given the cross-pollination between HSUS, PETA, and ALF over the past few decades, as well as the same sort of thing popping up in various other similar situations (it’s almost a given that if HSUS gets or gives an honor by another organization, a quick look at the Board of the other organization will turn up this kind of cross-over), this is no surprise. 

I always advise, when researching HSUS or any other similar organization, follow the people and the money and see what that tells you about motivation and who’s in bed with whom (figuratively and, in some cases, occasionally, literally, it seems).

Yes, HSUS seems to have a knack for self-promotion and recognition.  Your comment"When three out of your seven Board members (and your Executive Director, and an international bigwig) have close ties to the same outside organization, the seeds are already sown for a conflict of interest” could not be more to the point—CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

This reminds me of the same sort of conflict of interest that from the HR5422(shortend title known as the anti-dog debarking bill) that was proposed by Rep Ruppersberger, C. A. Dutch [MD-2] (introduced 5/27/2010).  Another truly clever HSUS conflict of interest. This bill authorizes the Federal Dept of AG to grant 1 MILLION dollars to any state that enacts an anti dog debarking bill and then allows states in turn to give the money to OTHER entities involved in animal protection, and the education on debarking.  This bill will actually use the Federal Government to BRIBE states to enact such a bill in a competitive basis that sets a ceiling on total money to be offered in grants to 12 ML in 2011 and 2012.  Can we just call it what it really is—the Feds will offer states bribe money to pass a law and will see to it that HSUS will likely receive the cash afterward!

As in the sanctuary case that you have cited, HSUS has clearly set itself up to engage states to enact an anti-debarking law by 2012, which it will write for them, and then will stand in line with hat in hand to collect up to 1 ML in each state that gets the golden coin for them.  Sweet deal if you can get it.  I call it, as you called the sanctuary deal, CONFLICT OF INTEREST!

HSUS seems to thrive on misrepresentation in everything it does—whether it is an award, a YouTube video, or the effort to pass a law—it is always about smoke and mirrors.

HSUS does a good cover up.  Of what?  Those who oppose illegal immigrants being here realize that the US agricultural industry in all phases from hatchling poultry through finished packaged beef ready to be put on your grocers’ shelves employ many, many illegal aliens.  What we hear is “HSUS is against cruelty to animals”.  What we aren’t told is that HSUS doesn’t ever quite get around to mentioning that they, while totally aware of it, how many illegals work in the animal agricultural industry.  In fact, quite the contrary.  In some states HSUS has already been politically inserted as a third party of no real standing to do the education and training of the work force employed in animal related agriculture.  Is HSUS really opposed to animal cruelty or is one of their most lucerative and politically powerful increasing functions to cover up that corporations throughout all of agriculture employ the largest percent of most illegal aliens in production of America’s food?  Once we had a well trained, literate and mostly union food production industry that was the envy of the world.  Today that’s no longer true and the cause is—largely unmitigated employer greed.    Greed for the lowest possible cost of employee available to be had.  We get on our plates precisely what we deserve for allowing any part of duplicity to continue.

All of the overlapping between these organizations is beginning to sound a lot like inbreeding and if you ask anyone involved in actually raising and caring for animals they can tell you what inbreeding does.  It could explain a lot of the irrational comments and actions that come out of these organizations.

Well, if you bear in mind that Oregon is the #5 State in Animal Rights law, it will make more sense.

There is almost no opposition to Animal Rights policies in this state; people in agriculture are still laughing at Animal Rights dogma for the most part, and most of the public lives (and votes) in the cities.

Bear with me here, while I do a bit of background and history.

Rescues are a little different from agriculture, being an Animal Rights concept in themselves, so it’s in no way surprising to me to read this. Dog rescues began around the early ‘70s, driven mostly by PeTA supporters, (animal lovers who didn’t fully grasp the ‘animal rights’ concept), because there was a need - or perhaps we should call it an opportunity or a vulnerability - at that time. They were pretty much confined to dogs at first.

Though some breeders did screen homes carefully, most did not, few had puppy contracts, and there were a fair number of purebreds going through the shelters. In fairness to the breeders, the public was a lot less clueless about pet ownership then, and probably the majority of placements worked fine, but purebreds were easy targets. In those years, though there were laws against animal abuse, they were poorly policed for the most part, which gave the Animal Rights activists considerable scope for ‘reform’. Though laws were pretty sketchy in a few places, in most places such reform should have been confined to improving policing, not passing new laws. However, we didn’t know then what we know now and the vast majority of the population is sickened by animal abuse of any kind. But ... those with the most knowledge about animals were too busy looking after animals to be playing politics or engaging in the education of the unwashed masses. Those dog breeders who were seeing their breed hitting the shelters responded handsomely, unaware that they were creating a monster in the long term. And by that time, newbies in the dog world were too often being indoctrinated by Animal Rights activists, without mention, of course, of animal-less vegan lifestyles. This is one reason why we have all these cross breed competition venues and registries now, too - though that is a different issue.

Dog ownership has to a large extent been conquered from within, and this is going to happen to horses too, if horsemen are not very vigilant. Now that the AR zealots have dogs tied up - no pun intended - the horse owners are taking the flack. A few years ago, a bunch of activists in Michigan jumped the gun and tried to pass a law outlawing horse bits, because they ‘are designed to hurt the horse’. They were ahead of their time, but in ten years or so, I expect to see horsemen actively fighting that battle. Yes, they are laughing now, but it won’t be any funnier for them than it is for dogs. And no, hackamores won’t be acceptable to animal activists. Halters, maybe, for a while.

Horse rescues are flourishing now though, peopled by idiots who don´t seem to know that horses grow winter coats and start shedding them (often messily) in the early spring. Breeders who manage their mares on pasture are terribly vulnerable to accusations of neglect on this front. They are also vulnerable on the matter of elderly horses which can not always be maintained in good flesh, though they remain healthy. Slightly underfed animals (and humans) are generally healthier and live longer lives than otherwise; certainly more so than the obese, but Animal Rights trained activists see any animal which is not rolling fat and glossy, whether that is its natural state or not as being emaciated and neglected. Sometimes breeders are victims because their breed doesn’t run to ‘easy keepers’ - animals which tend to run to fat if you aren´t careful, and which neophytes and Animal Rights activists like to see. In any case, small horse breeders are under siege now, and we can only expect to see it get worse. A huge horse rescue with a bunch of Animal Rights extremists on the board is no surprise at all. I’m sure they’ll be a roaring success, and that a lot of good, knowledgeable breeders will be crucified, vilified and impoverished, their bloodlines lost.

It suits the Animal Rights organizations very well to control the rescues, which they very often do. It gives them considerable influence in the community, both in the way of managing ordinances and County statutes as well as making sure the abuse they do see - and if you put yourself in the path of abuse and neglect this way, you WILL see what there is out there, even if it’s not much - is heavily publicized. Thus you can create more outrage among the naive public and pass yet more laws which will restrict animal ownership and breeding.

Sorry to be long winded. I hope, though, that it makes better sense now than it did.

i just read the post by hawthorne. thank you for that very informative post. very disturbing. if animal rights are going to police they should be by people who know the animal they are attempting to protect. bits are not made to hurt horses. nor do they hurt horses. if they did, this very large animal wouldn’t behave with it in his mouth. a horse cannot be forced to behave. they tell a rider when they are not happy or being hurt. i know this first hand. they will not stop until they make themselves understood either. even if it means dumping their rider. a bit is simply a communication tool. a “snaffle” has a break in the middle and are usually rubber and not used to pull on their faces. it’s for subtle hand signals which are combined with subtle leg movements. a horse can be stopped without pulling on their faces at all. thoroughbreds are very sensitive in the mouth and need very little mouth contact. a tight rein doesn’t mean pulling on the mouth or bit. it’s necessary for balance. their head and neck moves. if the rein has slack it’s like a water skier getting slack in the rope. they no longer have contact with the boat. lol. your center of gravity is off and your horse can also loose his balance. the sport horse could not perform without a bit. jumpers would have no control. they would kill themselves. the horses would have no balance and would be running through fences. it’s a tool. like crops and pokers. pokers aren’t used to kick horses with and crops aren’t used to beat them. horses have carried us through history. they have fought wars with us. they have delivered our mail. they have worn armor and pulled machines and wagons full of people. trust me, you would never have wanted to be on a wagon without bits on those horses.
what HUMANEWATCH is doing is so important because these animal rights groups and the HSUS, doesn’t know a thing about the animals they are saying they want to protect. it’s all reminding me of what’s happening to CPS, Probation, and law enforcement. they answer to no one. so, it’s up to us. i think there are too many laws as it is. way too many laws. professionals should be trusted to care for their animals. unless you are raised with horses, you don’t know anything about them. there is way too much animal abuse by people who aren’t real breeders or don’t raise horses. they just go buy them because they want one and know nothing about caring for them. these are the people who need to have their animals removed. the HSUS should not be rescuing anyones animals. they still kill animals at their so called shelters. until they quit doing that, i don’t want them rescuing my pets if they happen to get out. which has happened and they said they didn’t have my dog and they did. i had a friend go in and pretend to want to adopt and there she was. about to be killed. a female black and white pit bull with hot pink toe nails. hard to miss.